SIDHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I he six appellants are all members of one family-one should rather say, members of one branch of a family, the other branch of which is represented by Bapulal, and his son Kailash, who was the victim of an attack by these six persons, with the use of lathis and at least one cutting weapon (farsa) and one pointed weapon (ballam). The appellants Siddhu, Madan, Brijlal and Jeetmal are brothers inter se and also the brothers of Bapulal father of Kailash, Triveni is the son of Brijlal while Ghanshyam is the son of Jeetmal. They have all been convicted under section 148, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years under that count. They have also been convicted under section 307 read with section 149, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six years and again under section 307 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six years. All the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) BETWEEN the branch of these appellants and that of Bapulal there had been serious disputes regarding agricultural land. A year or two before this incident which was on 13 1-1971 there were proceedings under sections 145 and 107, Criminal Procedure Code between the two groups. Two or three months before this incident one of the appellants had started a criminal case against Bapulal's branch which seems to have been pending at that time. On this background it is admitted by both the parties that at about 9-0 A. M. on 13-1-1971 when Kailash was cutting grass at the fields a short distance outside the village he was set upon by a number of assailants and belaboured very severely. The results showed that the total effect was one endangering life. There were 14 marks found on him when he was examined medically in course of the day. Two of them were incised wounds on the head, one more than 5" wide and the other 11/2" wide. However, the bone was not cut, and each by itself was a simple injury ; if we take into account the possibility of danger to- life, the weapon being a sharp edged one and the part of the body being the head, it becomes grievous injury endangering life. There were two penetrating wounds, simple, indicating that some sort of pointed weapons had been used. There were 10 lathi marks two of which involved fractures of bones one on the foot and the other on the left band. The remaining eight marks were lathi blows each simple by itself though the cumulative effect was serious.

(3.) THE appellants began by making a total denial but have later on softened to the extent that according to them only the two appellants Triveni and Ghanshyam were there and they might have attacked Kailash. On the charges themselves it is urged that in any event the prosecution has implicated the entire family and again exaggerated the nature of the violence. THE common object if at all was only to "give a thrashing" as stated by learned counsel here, and each of the appellants would be liable only for the acts definitely attributed to him. Since the fractures were not proved and at least one of the X-ray skiagrams had not been produced in the Sessions Court they could be convicted under sections 323 and 324, Indian Penal Code only.